POTD Kendrys Morales 2014
That is soooooome kinda shekel I saved here, Dept.

.

Q.  Why would anybody read an SSI "article" when --- > the shout box (SBox 5) is available?

A.  They don't.  We've been approached about using article area (below the fold) for encoded messages.  The Shout Box is Dr. D's first stop in the mornin'.  B'lee DAT.

I defy you to show me the baseball area that offers the SBox' blend of wit, wisdom, diverse personalities, "hard" news delivered on the nanosecond, and ... its absence of Dr. D.  Eh?  Thought not.

....

Q.  What's the CIA encoded message on this trade?  Start with the depressing.

A.  It's depressing, to me, to focus 80% on what you PAY rather than what you RECEIVE.  

(In Rembrandt's "Rich Fool," you can palpably feel the old man's mezmerization with the cold metal.  He's in a deep hypnotic trance, lost in thought about all the things this metal means to him.

It feels a little claustrophobic, because in surrounding himself with the coinage, he's created a blockade situation.  Tightly blocked off is, um, Life.  Not "life" in the cliched sense, but "life" in the higher sense - the ability to grow, to be vital, to give, to be free, to manifest activity, to leave a legacy, etc.)

General principles aside, the Mariners did score a MOTO hitter, Safeco-proven, and gave nothing.  In this specific case, Dr. D would have snapped the Twins' hands off.  But in a depressed way.  This trade rat cheer, it is the quintessential Fangraphs trade.  Which does not make it wrong.

.

Q.  Kendrys is Safeco-proven?

A.  His career Safeco line, this being the results he has achieved while playing inside the Seattle ballpark:

G S AVG OBP SLG HR RBI BB K 2B Remark
110 .287 .340 .498 19 69 34 79 35 :- O
Per 162 .287 .340 .498 28 102 50 119 52 Slap me silly

Other players who might hit .287/.340/.498 -- with 28 homers and 52 doubles -- inside the Park of Doom:

  • Mike Trout
  • Miguel Cabrera
  • Edgar
  • Nick Franklin, once he gets to Oakland's Park of Doom

We don't say he'll slug .500 again.  But we'll say it one last time:  Kendrys Morales can rake.

.

Q.  Are 39 games in Minnesota an effective spring training?  Is it uncomfortable to trade for somebody who has NOT hit six homers in the last week?

A.  You never trade for that player.  A guy who hit six homers in the last 8 games, let's hold off on that deal.

.

Q.  How about Kendrys getting too old?  He just now turned 31 in late June.

A.  Age-arcs defy a dogmatic analysis, but:

  • Kendrys is a switch hitter, therefore not lacking a "tick" against either LHP or RHP - that's nice
  • He is non-greedy, willing to line a double the other way - that's nice
  • At his level of competence, a whale of a lot of players become horse manure at 31-32 ... that's not nice
  • Do note that the M's, armed with internal info on his health, gym results, etc., offered 3 years

Here is Shandler on Kendrys going into 2014:

  • PX (essentially "normalized" slugging) took a dip in 2013
  • But 2nd half HR/F rebounded nicely
  • xPX (expected SLG, derived from BABIP velocity) looks positive
  • Contact rates, and BB%, set a nice floor
  • Solid effort hitting RH (in 2013) adds to the good news
  • Finally healthy?  UPSIDE:  return to 2009 glory in 2014

Wowza-pa-looza.  The component stats point to a player getting better?

.......

I've always taken Kendrys as a 70 HITter and a 55 PWR guy -- "fat Ichiro," Inside Pitch used to call him.  We saw this in the Twins' visit to Safeco.  

.

Q.  Remind us of the backstory again?

A.  A little while ago, Fangraphs ran a little story saying that Morales, Konerko, and 3 other guys were baseball's most average players, hitting 2.0 WAR on the dot.

Dr. D responded to this by pointing out that WAR achieved from the actual batter's box are at a premium.  A few months later, having noticed that Morales can flat-out rake, USSM recommended a large, long extension for Morales at 3-WAR territory.

:: shrug ::

.

Q.  What hitters are comparable?

A.  In the 70's they had a Billy Williams doll -- "wind it up and it hits line drives."  Morales has been a 100% legit 120-130 OPS+ bat, almost no defensive value.  But Kendrys enjoys "pitcher's pitches," savors the opportunity to bounce them off the oppo-field fence, and that's the point here.  

That is what the Mariner lineup needs:  players who make their money off of GOOD pitchers.

.

Q.  What do you mean, "line drives?"  His Fangraphs "LD%" is not remarkable.

A.  We're talking about the time the ball is in the air.  Morales has a topspin swing; the ball gets to grass quickly, whether they grade it a fly ball or line drive.  (He's got the tennis groundstroke followthrough, the 1.4 grounder rate, and the nice HR rate.  He's a topspinner.)

He hits the top half of the ball.  The grounders have pace on them, are unpredictable in location.  The fly balls get between the outfielders with the "groundstroke" shape to their arcs.  It's just hard to get under the balls he swats.

.......

Morales projects to very "hard" .270-.280 in Safeco, 50 walks, 20 homers, 30 doubles, and lead the team in RBI.  Other players who might do the same as Mariners:

  • Kyle Seager (if he were a DH)
  • Ryan Zimmerman (DH)
  • Bryce Harper (this year's version)
  • Chase Utley DH (if he's not done)
  • Justin Upton
  • Angel Pagan
  • Pablo Sandoval
  • Adrian Gonzalez
  • Aaron Hill

Also, this year's incarnation of Prince Fielder was doing about what Kendrys does, park-adjusted.

Which brings up the question of baserunning speed.  There's a legit thumb on the scale against Kendrys for that ... -2, -3 runs a year.   Edgar/Olerud rule:  Kendrys walks with two out, it's going to take four more offensive events to score him.

Get his 80 ribbies.  But score you only 60.  Kendrys is a "hitter."  He is not a "star."  He's a Scrub, but Dr. D's kind of Scrub, the kind he'll go to war with.

.

Q.  Is SSI at all worried that such a line-drive machine will flop down the stretch?

A.  Every player up to and including Kyle Seager has a 10%, 20% chance of a huge funk starting this month.  I like Kendrys' floor.

BABVA,

Dr D

 

Blog: 

Comments

1

tjm: This pathetic. Z: I have got to thank ownership for allowing us to do this. They have said all along if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources, in this particular case they stepped up and this was great. I really, really appreciate it, we all appreciate it. My hat is off to them. I don't know what else will happen, we will continue conversations."
Zduriencik was talking about the Morales trade?  As though ownership had approved a Samardzija-Hammels deal?
:: blinks ::
Did Billy Beane gush all over his owners after making an actual go-for-it blockbuster deal?
Every time I think that I'm past it, as far as the anti-ownership angst...  Yay howdy.  We went from $90 to $94 and upgraded DH from "sucking hole" to "DH."  OK, fair enough.  See?  We listen.    :: sits back, basks ::

2
bsr's picture

Yes that was verbatim from Drayer's writeup. The full text below. What is most maddening is this "everybody has a budget they have to work within" nonsense. Attendance is up 2,000 a night this year, which I am certain they did not budget for because the lowest paid attendance night so far this year is comparable to the worst nights of last year, meaning they did not sell any further season tickets in the offseason. Ergo, they clearly have unexpected revenue from more single game sales, that should offer the type of flexibility they needed to sign Morales. Furthermore, Hart is not hitting his incentives so that is even more slack in the "budget".
This falling all over himself to publicly "thank ownership" for spending extra petty cash they have lying around...churns my stomach, to see a tough old guy like Z having to grovel like that. But I guess that's the Mariners kabuki.
Is he still in active talks for another bat or is this the move?
"It's a move right now. You never know what is going to happen. I have got to thank ownership for allowing us to do this. They have said all along if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources, in this particular case they stepped up and this was great. I really, really appreciate it, we all appreciate it. My hat is off to them. I don't know what else will happen, we will continue conversations. Everybody has a budget that they have to work within and I think what they have done is, we want to stay in this thing and we want to be in the playoffs. We will see what happens. I do have discussions with other clubs about a lot of different things. Who knows what's around the corner. I don't have that answer right now."
http://mynorthwest.com/374/2572224/Zduriencik-on-Morales-Taylor-and-more...

3

When you first printed that quote in the ShoutBox, I thought you were being sarcastic. Ah, the perverse joys of being a Mariners fan.

4
tjm's picture

. . . . or even something Z has to go to ownership to get aprroval for, the chances of Kemp coming here -or any other big bat - just disappeared over the horizon. I mean, really, this is a couple million bucks on a team that is half full of guys making the MLB minimum.
I'm sorry, Doc, I know you've tried hard to stay away from ownership bashing and I generally haven't thought that to be the main problem, so I don't intend to throw fuel on that particular fire, but my goodness this is just sad. A veteran guy like Z shouldn't be in a position where he has to kiss up like this.. Actually, nobody should.

5

To add to tjm's point, this was a couple of million bucks on a team that saved six million on Hart bonuses.  
Egads!  Did it take Z weeks to get this one approved?  Sheeesh.  
I need to drink way more than I do if I'm gong to survive that kind of baseball thought.
I'm blinkin' right with you, Doc.  
Holy snot...
 

6

I have indeed tried (and failed) to keep things positive, to not react to the M's ownership committee or Fangraphs authors.  That you perceived such is consoling.
.........
Even more consoling, the remarks about Zduriencik's groveling.  Sometimes you think you're crazy; then a couple of good men tell you No.  You are right to feel this way.
This mini-move, stapled to that "Ownership has said all along" quote, makes me sick to my stomach.  Glad to hear it isn't my neurosis.  This time :- )

7

1.  As a general principle, Dr. D does not blame senior execs for bowing deeply to CEO's.
2.  95% of us had to have grok'ked, instantly, that if ownership had to "special approve" this little deck shuffle, then --- > all the talk about Price and Kemp & etc. deals meant very little.
3.  You think rival GM's -- who already seem to view the M's as liars and not buyers -- didn't notice this quote?
4.  Dr. D will say, in his own defense, that he spent precious little time chasing rumors in 2014 (in other words, nobody here is surprised).  We'll take Pat Bowlen, please, whether or not he's only partially present nowadays.
.........
5.  Supposing that the M's make a big trade next week:  big fat hairy deal.  It's not going to mean the culture has changed.

8
Phil's picture

I've been lurking, nicely, this site since the Detecto days. It provides the jazz to the top 40 stuff, including the shouts and Specs mighty efforts. Daily reading and thank you. Agree Morales is a nice start. Was at the game tonight and counted standing for Taylor's first hit as a, moment. That was, it, unfortunately. Thank you for the great site and if there is ever a get together at Capps at Tapps I am completely in.
Phil

9
Bladestunner316's picture

This to me sounds like a man with a gun pointed to his head and praising a .15 cent raise.
Although there is also that side of me that reads through or into the lines that he may have been approved on a bigger trade.
It just happens in business that this went first.
Kinda like the wife just approved me getting a big screen and I bought the power cord first.
This was a smart move. Low cost high potential upside for a proven safeco bat.
Its the kind of move that says hey I can get David price minus zobrist and the extra specs it would cost.
Like hey I just got the same type of HDMI cable from mono price for cheaper and can use the extra cash to get more blu rays!

10
GLS's picture

It's really my worst fears realized. I don't think Z has any budgetary authority at all - not in the offseason and not during the season.

11

What jumped out to me was this: "They have said all along if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources..."
If?  Then?  Is it too much to ask to maybe put yourself in position to "think you're in it" at the start of a season?  If you get lucky with the scraps you're given, then we might allow you to fight with the Morenos?
Sometimes the real news is not in the big news, but in decoding the language of the spin.
BTW, if Z was going to complain about the budget discreetly, how would he do it?  Things that make you go "hmmmmmm"....

12
okdan's picture

This is a great catch in Z's language. IF? How about we make the resources available BEFORE we "think we're in it." Or rather, why don't we always try do be in it, using our resources? Yikes. That quote makes me so sad.

13
okdan's picture

Here's one way to read it: what if Jack poured it on extra thick, because he's fed up. You know, damning with faint praise kinda deal. I can almost read it like that. That he goes so far out of his way to thank his masters – the guy's gotta realize it's a small deal, and thinks it's ridiculous how fragile the ownership's fortitude is for risk. At least I hope so. Not sure why I continue to give Z the benefit of the doubt. At some point you're just complicit.

14

Pointing out the obvious, but we were "in" it a month ago.  We've been a real WC contender that long, or longer.
So did it take 30+ games to convince FO types that the chump change that Morales would cost might actually bring significant help?  I'm having a hard time believing that.  
No FO type is that slow on that small of amount.  Or I hope not.  We've been talking Byrd and he was way more expensive.  Jack had to have had some approval.
And there has been WAY too much smoke linking the M's to the Rays for all of that just to have been nonsense.  I'm back to thinking that  Jack slowly realized he couldn't trade with the Rays w/o selling the farm and finally moved on.  It may have taken the Rays to say, "Listen Jack baby, were back in the race so we don't have to do anything.  We're breathing down your neck and we're riding a hot rocket while your's is all a fizzle.  You want the big lefty?  Then pony up big!"
After sleeping on it, I refuse to believe that we've not been fixated on TBR.   If I"m wrong I'll gulp the hemlock, but it has gone on so long that if it were not true you think Jack would have just said so. 
All that said, this has to be move one of a two move process.  Or a three move process if you consider an announcement (eventual) that we've signed Kendrys to a 2-year deal a move.    If you get Kendrys then you can move Smoak or LoMo.
For Rios, perhaps.  He played last night and batted 3rd.
Or maybe we just go get Souza.  Please......
But there must be another move.
 
 

15

I remember back when the owners approved the salary caps and profit sharing. We were filling the Safe nightly, TV ratings were through the roof, Moreno didn't own the Angels, the Rangers were down and boring, and I thought, "Why on earth are Howard and Armstrong voting for this? We can be the Yankees of the AL West. We'll dominate this thing for a decade. Only Beane stands in our way, and we're throwing him, and all those other small market franchises we USED to be but are not any longer a bone? Heck, we're throwing him a nightly steak dinner? Why???"
It's never been so clear as it is now. I thought we could rise above it, compete the way Beane does, with more resources at least. We could, for a while maybe - if we keep our young stud, and they become young stars. But we'll never get over the hump. We'll have to be extra lucky as well as smarter than the average GM. And I don't see that happening. I don't see the workable model here.
Nintendo saved Seattle baseball...for this. Nightly coitis interruptus.

16

Reading this quote this morning shocks me. Do they think we're fools? (Well, with some of the whoppers being swallowed hook, line, and sinker in the hard news these days, perhaps our country has really got to that point).
Or is this an inartful way of signaling something to potential trading partners? If so, the emphasis is on "inartful" rather than "signaling."
I mean, really, it just looks like Jack is groveling, sniveling at the feet of Howard Lincoln in order to keep his job. It's downright undignified. No one should want to keep their job THAT badly. Well, ALMOST no one.

17

I think Z was all in for Price/Zobrist (at the right cost, of course).
That evaporated, and Morales was the first part of plan B. Will there be a second part? Who knows?
I read the quote as, "I'm really happy with that first helping...may I have another, sir?"

18
bsr's picture

Who ever knows what is really going on behind the scenes in Marinerville. The principals themselves are pathologically closed off and unaccountable to the public, and Seattle lacks a useful sports media that would ask the type of tough questions needed to get the truth (especially post-Baker). So we are all forced to hyper-analyze every public utterance and outside rumor, in the attempt to figure out what our team is up to.
Putting together everything we've seen and read recently, here is my take on what's gone down:
1. First principle: the M's, due to their ownership situation, do not have the ability to "invest" in the team's payroll beyond actual cash in the bank. (This means the TV money won't be spent until it has actually been received, which I assume has not happened yet, since they aren't spending more.)
2. The M's set a budget in the offseason, using projected revenues, and Z spent it (including $7M incentive money for Hart).
3. Hart sucked, and won't get his incentives. This frees up $7M in cash for Z to spend this year, all else being equal.
4. M's paid attendance has so far been improved over last year, by 2,000/game. This adds ~$5M in cash revenue (depending on assumptions about the net profit per fan, all-in). I assume this was NOT factored into the budget, as the M's are undoubtedly conservative in their projections, and there is clear evidence they didn't add much to the season ticket base in the offseason (lowest attendance night this year is comparable to lowest of last year, plus if they had sold a bunch of tickets post-Cano I'm sure we'd have heard about it).
5. Add it all up, and Jack has ~$10M to spend this year at the deadline. I don't know if it's $10M, but I am 100% certain he had the $4M needed to take on Fat Ichiro.
6. Despite this, Jack made a theatrical show of thanking ownership for allowing him to spend money that was already sitting there (that in fact he had already "spent" once, on Hart). Seems quite odd right? So why would he do this? My Marinerologist interpretation:
6a. Jack does not have the authority to spend freely (at least not after he's spent the initial budget once). All major (in-season) roster decisions impacting the budget must be vetted by someone(s) else above him. (I have no idea btw, if this is abnormal for a baseball GM.) This is further evidenced by the "hard to get to the finish line" comments about Jack from other teams on MLBTR.
6b. The M's authorities had in fact already authorized him to spend the full free ~$10M. And maybe had even taken a collective deep breath and agreed to let him spend even more than that (i.e., to take a financial risk with their capital).
6c. The specific deal that the M's authorities had in mind, when giving Jack the aforementioned financial authority, was a heavily rumored, internally vertigo-inducing swap of: several prized prospects for David Price and Ben Zobrist. However, the Rays started winning and backed out of talks.
6d. The normally tight lipped M's authorities whined publicly about the Rays backing out of this deal. We don't know who the source(s) were. My guess is it was either (a) Jack's superiors - who wanted to let M's fans know they tried to do something, and also felt offended that they'd gone outside their comfort zone and authorized a risky move, then had it blow up in their face. And/or it was (b) Jack, who had put his (very limited) credibility on the line with his bosses to convince them that this was a real thing that he was going to get done, then failed, and was angry and frustrated about it.
6e. Put this all together, and it becomes likely IMO, that Jack was actually thanking ownership not for the Fat Ichiro deal, but for authorizing the failed Rays deal - over which many feelings were undoubtedly hurt (and which possibly had given Jack personally a big black eye, if he had gone to the mat to convince his bosses he could get it done, then didn't).
7. Final prediction / silver lining: there is still ~$6M to be spent this year, and Jack will go spend it, assuming he can find trade opportunities that his bosses approve of. If he can't, the M's will just bank a nice cash profit, or shine up the Hit it Here sign real nice, or whatever else they spend cash on other than baseball players.

19

Here is a quote from Mather
http://seattletimes.com/html/larrystone/2024002345_stone06xml.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mather says, emphatically, that the Mariners have the financial resources to enhance the roster, despite speculation to the contrary.
“I’ve heard national reporters have said that Jack (Zduriencik, the general manager) has no flexibility, that’s why he’s trading like (salaries) for like,” Mather said. “One day, I called him in and I said, ‘You know, we have flexibility.’ He said: ‘I know. Kevin, it’s just part of the negotiations.’ ”
Mather added: “We have flexibility. Our owners are excited where we are.”"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I'm also pretty sure after that interview Jack went on record saying that all of the "we have no money" talk was simply a negotiation tactic.
That to me sounds like Jack telling us he's trying to be a use car salesman and to not "believe what he says"
BUT
If that's really what's going on here then is this quote by Jack just another way to tell all the other GM's that if you want to trade, don't expect us to pay a bunch of $$ to your player when he comes to Seattle? Is that a shot at the guys in LA. "hey we want Kemp but you better eat a bunch of his contract"?
OR
Is Mather the one posturing and trying to make himself look good at Jacks expense and Jack really did have to beg for the extr.............wait........beg for what? It's already been stated that Hart will not make his bonus money.........So isn't Kendrys pretty much a wash? Don't all the other GM"s around the league know that too? Of course they do.......hmmmmm.............
Maybe the people pointing out that the M's are in for a BIG fish and that's what the money is for............BUT why would he mention that in a deal that cost the M's pretty much nothing?
I think Jack is just trying to get someone to play extra for his used car with that cool "blue Smoak" because the blue Smoak is a "custom" feature so it's worth more!
Here's to hoping that something bigger is just around the corner!

20

Reports are we gave the Rockies an actual formal offer. I don't see any reports it has been rejected, or that we've pulled it. They want young pitching in return and we have that. But...I sure hope we can do better than Stubbs. I used to be in favor of it, but we need more than an outfielder who can hit left handers decently. It probably wasn't much of an offer - little more than what we gave up for Morales, I suspect.

22

Announce publicly that Jack is openly lying to other GMs about flexibility in negotiations? There's a real head scratcher.

23

1.  They absolutely, totally, beyond any shadow of anyone's doubt need an outfielder.
2.  Morales is not an outfielder. 
3.  Therefore they will make at least one more move.

24
bsr's picture

The discouraging "if we get a chance where we think we are in it, then we are going to give you the resources" actually fits nicely into my Unified Theory of the Mariners as well.
If you take as first assumption that the M's are cash-constrained, then obviously they can't commit resources they don't have. The only scenario where it would be even possible to increase spending, is if they are (a) doing better revenue-wise than expected - which I believe they are with the attendance boost so far - and thus able to revise the budget upward; and more importantly (b) looking at a potential immediate return on the investment, i.e. a pennant race and possible playoffs to boost revenues further and cover the increased costs quickly.
It is depressing that we are stuck with this ownership situation, but for me personally at least, I find it less depressing to view it through a financial lens, than to worry about things like the M's leadership "not caring about winning".

26
bsr's picture

Every team knows every other team's basic financial situation, including exactly how much money they are taking in daily, their contracts, etc. They know the M's had $7M in incentives for Hart freed up, and that attendance is up. The only thing other GM's don't know is how much each ownership group is willing to invest in the team's payroll in relation to revenues, in the short term. That question is what all this sort of trade negotiation gamesmanship revolves around.
So I don't see this as a strategic comment by Mather, I am sure he is just answering a reporter's question and being honest about something that is obvious to every other team in baseball - which is that the M's have some payroll room. Notice though he was totally vague about how much room...so in reality he revealed nothing.
As for the original story that Mather was being asked about, stating that the M's have no payroll room...I am 100% sure Jack did not go around saying that to other GM's, because it is obviously not true, and it would be a laughable claim. It was just a puff piece rumor story written by somebody else. I'm sure there are more than a few reporters out there who find it enjoyable to poke at the M's leadership group.

27
tjm's picture

. . . Z has to be playing a long game, some sort of weird double-bank. I now refuse to believe otherwise, cuz if I did I'd have to - ala Ichiro - slap myself in the face.

28

It seems like every year we reach this same point -- some years much sooner than later -- where we wish against history that THIS will be the year the M's choose to make THE move. *sigh*
For want of a shekel a player is passed
The crowds that once crowded at Safeco have massed
And waiting and watching they wonder again
For want of a shekel our roster stays thin
For want of a nickel a hitter we miss
The M’s fans know never that moment of bliss
Of welcoming gladly that last puzzle piece
For want of a nickel contending hopes cease
For want of a mite our roster is churned
We’re hoping in luck and are bound to be burned
Hunting lightning with bottles is our S.O.P.
For want of mite we now want mightily
For want of a dollar our purpose we choose
To stand mediocre and simply to lose
Just a few fewer games than the fans can withstand
For want of a dollar we’ll never be grand
For want of a penny decisions are made
To hold them too tightly and pittance is paid
To the men called to charge circumstances severe
For want of a penny there’s no cavalry here
For want of a shekel a player is passed
In search of a backbone our players are asked
To make bricks without straw, to make light without heat
For want of a shekel the Mariners get beat

30
GLS's picture

That's the difference that I can see, or at least that's one of the pearls I took from Moneyball. Beane may have fewer resources, but within the scope of the budget that he's given he can pretty much wheel and deal and do what he wants to try and improve the on-field product. I don't think Z has anything like that authority - not even remotely close.

32
GLS's picture

I like the player, but if you look at his splits this year, his production is about as one-sided as it gets in favor of Coors Field. Honestly, Stubbs might be better off going to Japan. He could be all world over there.

Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

shout_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.